On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 22:58 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 21:48 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 22:31 +0100, Laszlo Boszormenyi wrote: > > > On Fri, 2010-12-17 at 20:10 +0000, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > > > how about > > > > something like: > > > You mean leave 0.29.5 in the archive as is, but with shlibs as 0.29.3 ? > > > Like I prepared the package[1] and as debdiff[2] shows? > > > > Sorry if I've introduced any confusion here. To be honest, my thought > > was more toward re-introducing 0.29.3, hence the mention of a > > 0.29.5really0.29.3 "upstream" source version. > > Or I might just have confused myself instead *sigh* If you were > suggesting uploading 0.29.5-2 with the shlibs change to use 0.29.3 and > then leaving it in unstable and 0.29.3 in squeeze then yes, that would > be fine.
Ping? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
